Hungarian classiers

Aniko Csirmaz and va Dkny

University of Utah and Universtiy of Troms
acsirmaz@linguistics.utah.edu, eva.dekany@uit.no
March 24-26, 2010
1. Introduction
South-East Asian languages are well-known for being classier languages:
Chinese:
(1) Wo
I
zhege
this
xueqi
semester
shangle
took
san
three
men
Cl
ke.
courses
I took three courses this semester.
(Zhang, 2007, pg. 52, ex. 23 a)
Hungarian is generally considered to be a non-classier language. However, Hungarian has numerous classi-
ers that show striking typological paralles with classiers in South-East Asian languages:
(2) Vett-em
buy.past-1sg
hrom
three
szl
CL
thread
rzs-t
rose-acc
I have bought three roses.
Goals
Describe the range of classier constructions and their distribution in Hungarian
Compare classier constructions in Hungarian and other, esp. South-East Asian languages
Provide tests that make a clear-cut between the dierent types of classiers
Give a syntactic analysis of Hungarian classier constructions
Claims
Hungarian bare nouns (e.g. knyv book) are non-atomic, they denote an undierentiated mass (<e,t>)
Bare nouns need a sortal Cl to carve them up into individuals (Cl can be overt or covert)
No sortal Cl in environments where an <e, t> type of predicate is also possible
(e.g. knyvet olvas read book (= read a book / books))

This talk reports on work in progress. We would like to thank Tarald Taraldsen, Antonio Fbregas and Edward J. Rubin
for helpful discussions and comments. All errors are our own.
1
Sortal classier and group classier distinctions, universally:
Sortal classiers are of category Cl, they sit in the extended projection line of the noun
Group classiers (e.g. Hungarian csorda herd) are of category N, they embed a small nominal
category
2. Bare nouns
2.1. Borer (2005) on the denotation of NP
The categories mass and count are not lexical specications, they correspond to a piece of structure
Nouns are neither inherently mass nor count in and of themselves, they merely denote stu
Nouns must be divided or portitioned out before they can be counted
This dividing out is done by a classier system, hosted in ClP
Derived count / mass distinction
Absence of dividing structure (bare nouns) mass
Presence of dividing structure count
2.2. Hungarian bare nouns
Hungarian is fully consistent with bare Ns denoting undivided stu
Bare nouns are restricted to the predicate operator position immediately preceding the verb
1
in this position morphologically singular count nouns can have a non-atomic interpretation
(3) Jnos
John
level-et
letter-acc
r
write
John is writing a letter
(4) *Jnos
John
r
write
level-et
letter-acc
John is writing a letter
(OK as a non-neutral sentence, with John in focus)
Collective predicates require a semantically plural argument
They can occur with morphologically singular bare Ns:
(5) Jnos
John
blyeg-et
stamp-acc
gyjt.
collect
John collects stamps
Other predicates are multiply ambiguous between a singular, plural or partitive reading
(6) Feri
F-nom
szendvics-et
sandwich-acc
eszik
eats
Feri eats (a) sandwich
((a) an entire sandwich; (b) part(s) of one or more sandwiches; (c) more than one entire sand-
wich)
1
The data and argumentation under the rst three points in this section are directly taken from Csirmaz and Szabolcsi (in
progress), also cf. Farkas and de Swart (2003).
2
(7) Feri
F-nom
leves-t
soup-acc
eszik
eats
Feri eats (some) soup.
(8) Van
is
szendvics
sandwich-nom
/
/
leves
soup-nom
a
the
htben
fridge-in
There is (some) sandwich / (some) soup in the fridge
Conclusion: Bare nouns in Hungarian denote non-individuated (mass) terms
2.3. Partitioning non-individuated denotation
Individuation (atoms) required for counting and specic reference
Numerals / quantiers: only atoms can be counted
Specicity must be established for atoms; no specic interpretation for bare nouns
Classiers required for atomic interpretation
Sortal classiers (with count nouns only)
General, productive classier: darab piece
( a productive classier, some classiers select a specic noun or a specic range of meaning)
Selected classiers (bors pea szem small.spherical, gyertya candle szl long.thin,
gyalogos infantryman f person, etc )
Overt and covert classiers
Mensural classiers (measure unit)
(a bucket of water, a pound of meat, a meter of ribbon)
Lexical contrasts
Lexically non-atomic, count (individuation by sortal Cl)
Lexically non-atomic, mass (individuation by mensural Cl)
as a tentative hypothesis, count and mass nouns dier in how their stu denotation can be
partitioned
there exist unique conventionalized units for count nouns, (e.g. for book, cup, all animate
individuals)
for mass nouns, either no conventionalized unit exists (e.g. sand), or there is no unique
conventionalized unit (e.g. coee, wine)
3
3. Classiers: General considerations
Classier distinction: (a) sortal Cl, (b) group Cl, (c) mensural Cl
(on the storal Cl vs mensural distinction, see Cheng and Sybesma (1998, 1999); Borer (2005); on sortal
versus group Cls, see Beckwith (1992, 2007); Zhang (2009a))
Hungarian English South-East Asian
Sortal CL
(9) egy
one
szem
CL
eye
cukor
candy
one candy
(10) (11) yi
one
ke
CL
tang
candy
one candy
Chinese (Zhang, 2007,
pg. 50)
Group CL
(12) egy
a
csom
bunch
zldhagyma
green.onion
a bunch of green onions
(usually 5, tied together
and sold as one unit)
(13) a book of needles (14) yi
one
bao
CL
xiangyan
cigarette
a pack of cigarettes
Chinese (Zhang, 2007,
pg. 48)
Mensural CL
(15) egy
one
csepp
drop
vr
blood
one drop of blood
(16) a drop of blood (17) yat
one
dihk
drop
hyut
blood
a drop of blood
Cantonese (Matthews
and Yip, 1994, pg. 98)
Classiers are licensed by numerals, quantiers (including how many) or a singular demonstrative pro-
noun
2
2
"The synchronic universal seems to hold that whenever a numeral classier construction is also used in non-quantier
constructions, the construction with demonstratives is one of these, often the only one" (Greenberg, 1972, pg. 36). Mandarin
Chinese and Hungarian are examples of languages that require (Mandarin) or allow (Hungarian) a classier with demonstratives
even in the absence of a numeral.
4
Licensing classiers in Hungarian
Sortal CL Group CL Mensural CL
CL + bare noun: *
(18) *fej
CL
head
salta(k)
lettuce-pl
(head of) lettuce
(19) *falka
pack
farkas
wolf
pack of wolves
(20) *tepsi
pan
sti
pastry
Denite article + CL + N: * (deniteness in itself does not license CL)
(21) *a
the
fej
CL
head
salta(k)
lettuce-pl
the (head of) lettuce
(22) *a
the
falka
pack
farkas
wolf
the pack of wolves
(23) *a
the
tepsi
pan
sti
pastry
the pan of pastries
Numeral + CL + N:
(24) hrom
three
fej
CL
head
salta
lettuce
the (heads of) lettuce
(25) hrom
three
falka
pack
farkas
wolf
three pack of wolves
(26) hrom
three
tepsi
pan
sti
pastry
three pans of pastries
Singular demonstrative + def. article + CL + N
3
:
(27) az
that
a
the
fej
CL
head
salta
lettuce
that (head of) lettuce
(28) az
that
a
the
falka
pack
farkas
wolf
that pack of wolves
(29) az
that
a
the
tepsi
pan
sti
pastry
that pan of pastries
Plural demonstrative + def. article + CL + N+Pl: ??
(30) ??az-ok
that-pl
a
the
fej
CL
head
salt-k
lettuce-pl
those (heads of) lettuce
(31)??az-ok
that-pl
a
the
falka
pack
farkas-ok
wolf-pl
those packs of wol-
ves
(32) ??az-ok
three-pl
a
the
tepsi
pan
sti-k
pastry-pl
those pans of pastries
Quantier + CL + N:
(33) sok
many
fej
CL
head
salta
lettuce
many (heads of) let-
tuce(s)
(34) sok
many
falka
pack
farkas
wolf
many packs of wolves
(35) sok
many
tepsi
pan
sti
pastry
many pans of pastries
We conne our attention to sortal and group CLs in this talk
Sortal and group CLs group together; distinguishing them is not trivial (especially in light of the lexical
specication of count nouns in Hungarian and Mandarin)
5
4. Sortal versus group classiers
4.1. A birds eye view
4.1.1. Tests to tease apart the two types
Dierences between the two Cl types in terms of syntactic position and distribution are expected, as sortal
and group Cls have a dierent function:
Sortal Cls portition out stu so that stu becomes countable; thus theses Cls must be between the
projection of stu (N) and counters (numerals, quantiers)
Group Cls do not portition out stu they are more similar to counters instead; as they require
a (plural) set consisting of already divided stu; thus these Cls must come on top of the division-
performing ClP
Such dierences are indeed attested and can be used to tell whether a given Cl is of the sortal or group type.
Partially building on Zhang (2009a,b), we present the following tests to distinguish sortal and group Cls:
Adjectival modication
Adjectives predecing the Cl modiy (a) the noun with sortal Cls but (b) the Cl itself with group
Cls
(36) 2
2
nagy
big
szem
CL
eye
gyngy
pearl
2 big pearls
(37) 2
2
nagy
big
falka
pack
kutya
dog
2 big packs of dogs
The same adjective or adjectives with contradictory meaning (a) cannot appear with sortal Cls,
but (b) can appear with group Cls
(38) *2
2
nagy
big
szem
CL
eye
nagy/kis
big/small
gyngy
pearl
2 big pearls
(39) 2
2
nagy
big
falka
pack
nagy/kis
big/small
kutya
dog
2 big packs of big/small dogs
Numerals and ellipsis
4
The presence or absence of the classied noun makes a signicant meaning dierence only with
(a) sortal Cls, but not with (b) group Cls
(40) 2
2
szem
CL
eye
gyngy
pearl
=
=
2
2
szem
CL
eye
2 pearls = 2 eyes
(41) 2
2
falka
pack
kutya
dog

2
2
falka
pack
2 packs of dogs 2 packs
4
All examples in (40) - (43) have an elliptical interpretation. In these elliptical readings all examples are grammatical and
have the same reading as the non-ellipted, full phrase. In this section we are interested only in the non-elliptical interpretations.
6
The presence of absence of the Cl (a) does not aect the interpretation with sortal Cls, but (b) it
yields a signicant meaning change with group Cls
(42) 2
2
szem
CL
eye
gyngy
pearl
=
=
2
2
gyngy
pearl
2 pearls = 2 pearls
(43) 2
2
falka
pack
kutya
dog
=
=
2
2
kutya
dog
2 packs of dogs = 2 dogs
4.1.2. Accounting for the facts
Sortal Cls
Are not nouns, they belong to the functional category Cl
Phrases with a sortal Cl involve one extended NP, that of the classied noun
[
NP
Cl ... N ]
Group CLs
Are nouns
Phrases with a group Cl involve two extended NPs: one projected by the group Cl, the other by
the noun
[
NP
N
Cl
[
NP
N ]]
Adjectives and Cls
The adjective facts follow because
adjectives always modify the head noun
every noun has its own range of adjectives that modify it
Sortal and group Cls (subscripts on AP indicate the N modied)
Sortal Cl: [
NP
(AP
N
) Cl ... N ]
Group Cl: [
NP
(AP
Ncl
) N
Cl
[
NP
(AP
N
) N ]]
We expect that the pattern of adjectival modication holds cross-linguistically
c.f Thai examples mirror the Hungarian order and show the same pattern with adjective modi-
cation (Hundius and Klver, 1983, pg. 169171):
(44) nk
bird
tua
CL
jj
big
the big bird
(45) *nk
bird
f uuN
swarm
si-khaw
green
(swarms cannot be green)
(46) nk
bird
f uuN
swarm
jj
big
a large swarm of birds
(47) nk
bird
jj
big
f uuN
swarm
jj
big
a large swarm of big birds
No overt N head
The facts with omission of the classied noun follow because
Every phrase must have a head,
In (40) szem will be interpreted as the nominal (N) head (and not as a sortal classier Cl),
7
In (41) the group Cl is the (N) head, taking the classied noun as a complement (c.f. eat
eat pizza)
The facts with omission of the classier follow because
(40) is possible because overt sortal classiers are optional in Hungarian
(there exists a covert, phonologically empty sortal classier)
In (41) the classied noun is an optional complement of the group Cl
We expect the classied noun and classier omission facts to be language-specic;
in languages with only overt (sortal) classiers, the omission in (40) - (43) will lead to ungram-
maticality
4.2. Sortal classiers
Dixon (1982, 1986): isolating languages are likely to have classiers, inectional and strongly agglutinative
languages tend to have noun classes. This is admittedly only a tendency one which Hungarian does not
follow (agglutinative but has classiers).
Beckwith (1992, 2007) notes that there are sortal Cls in Hungarian and lists some sortal Cls, but his lists
are not exhaustive (only 7 Cls) and he does not discuss the distribution of sortal Cls
(48) f,
CL
head
,
ktet,
CL
volume
,
szl,
CL
thread
,
szem,
CL
eye
,
fej,
CL
head
,
t,
CL
stem
,
gerezd,
CL
clove
,
karika,
CL
ring
,
cs,
CL
tube
,
cikk,
CL
article
,
rd,
CL
rod
,
bokor,
CL
bush
,
vekni,
CL
loaf
,
cserp,
CL
pot
,
csk,
CL
strip
,
darab,
CL
piece
,
rzsa,
CL
rose
,
v
CL
sheet
4.2.1. The Hungarian sortal Cl system is just like others
In Cl languages, nouns may be associated with more than one classier, depending on which property
of the noun is in focus
(49) kt
two
szem
CL
eye
kukorica
sweetcorn
two grains of sweetcorn
(50) kt
two
cs
CL
tube
kukorica
sweetcorn
two ears of sweetcorn
Cantonese (Matthews and Yip, 1994, pg. 106)
(51) nbouh
this
dihnluh
computer (classied as model)
(52) nga
this
dihnluh
computer (as a machine)
Japanese (Beckwith (2007), Naoyuki Yamato, p.c.)
(53) taoru-o
towel-ACC
go-mai
ve-CL
ve towels
(54) taoru-o
towel-ACC
go-hon
5-CL(extended cylindrical)
ve towels (rolled up)
Akatek Mayan (Zavala, 2000, pg. 127)
(55) ox-eb
3-inanim
kupan
CL
ixim
NOUNCL
paat
tortilla
three half-folded tortillas
(56) ox-eb
3-inanim
xoyan
CL
(circleshaped)
ixim
NOUNCL
paat
tortilla
three tortillas
8
Several CL languages have a generic/general CL that can appear with nouns not associated with a
specic shape-based sortal Cl
Examples include Chinese ge, Japanese tsu for inanimates (Downing, 1996), Korean kay for inanimates
(Lee and Ramsey, 2000), Vietnamese ci (Greenberg, 1972), Thai tsu and Pan (Deepadung, 1997)
The generic sortal CL in Hungarian is darab piece
5
Hungarian
(57) ht
seven
darab
CL
generic
sz
word
seven words
Chinese (Cheng and Sybesma, 1998)
(58) san
three
ge
CL
ren
people
three people
The generic classier darab frequently replaces a more specic classier in Hungarian:
(59) kt
two
szl
CL
thread
gyertya
candle
two candles
(60) kt
two
darab
CL
generic
gyertya
candle
two candles
and in Chinese: (Zhang, 2009b, pg.8)
(61) 3
3
zhang
CL
zhuozi
table
3 tables
(62) 3
3
ge
CL
generic
zhuozi
table
3 tables
The specic semantic content expressed by selected sortal classiers is most often tied to animacy,
shape, size and structure. In Hungarian sortal Cls tend to express shape and size:
(63) szem
small.spherical,
fej,
big.spherical,
szl,
long.thin,
karika
at.circular
Hungarian
(64) egy
one
szl
CL
thread
gyufa
match
one match
Thai (Beckwith, 2007, pg.151.)
(65) mj-khit
wood-match
n` y
one
kan
CL(stick-like)
one match
Hungarian
(66) egy
one
szem
CL
eye
rizs
rice
one grain of rice
Mandarin (Borer, 2005, pg.86.)
(67) yi
one
l
CL
mi
rice
one grain of rice
Hungarian
(68) egy
one
fej
CL
head
kposzta
cabbage
one head of cabbage
Taskhent Uzbek (Aikhenvald, 2000, pg.102.)
(69) bir
one
bs
CL
karm
cabbage
one head of cabbage
Languages that have a large class of numerals often have sortal classiers
Hungarian has a large class of numerals (see (70-b))
5
The Cebuano generic CL buPuk also means piece (Allan, 1977); it can appear with all N heads, including those without a
specic associated sortal Cl.
9
(70) a. t
ve
szl
CL
thread
virg
ower
ve owers
b. kt-milli
two-million
szl
CL
thread
virg
ower
two million owers
Classiers typically evolve from nouns
All Cls in Hungarian have a nominal use as well
6
Nouns for body parts and objects with canonical shapes are often used as classiers for inanimate
objects
Some typical nouns that can function as classiers:
head for big round objects, c.f. f head and fej head in Hungarian
(71) t
ve
fej
CL
head
kposzta
cabbage
ve heads of cabbage
(72) t
ve
f
CL
head
szemlyzet
personnel
ve personnel
eye for small spherical objects, c.f. szem eye in Hungarian
(73) ht
seven
szem
CL
eye
gyngy
pearl
seven pearls
thread for long thin objects, c.f szl thread in Hungarian
(74) tz
ten
szl
CL
thread
kolbsz
sausage
ten sausages
leaf for at exible objects, c.f. levl leaf in Hungarian
(75) hsz
twenty
levl
CL
leaf
gygyszer
pill
twenty strips of medicine
classiers occur in anaphoric phrases in all CL languages (Allan, 1977) and in Hungarian, too
Hungarian
(76) a. az
that
a
the
szem
CL
eye
gyngy
pearl
that pearl
b. az
that
a
the
szem
CL
eye
that one
(reference contextually determined;
possibly refers to a pearl)
Thai (Allan, 1977, pg. 286)
(77) a. ma
dog
tua
CL
nn
that
that dog
b. tua
CL
nn
that
that one
6
The use of a lexical entry as a noun or as a classier are clearly distinct, of course, as an N it is the head of the extended
nominal projection, as a Cl it it not.
10
4.2.2. Frequently raised objections, and why they can be dismissed
"These lexemes in Hungarian are probably not sortal CLs because . . . "
. . . because a large number of nouns cannot take a sortal Cl
BUT:
a noun can always take the generic Cl darab (if non-human),
unclassiable nouns are not uncommon in Cl languages
examples include several nouns in Burmese, and Thai (Allan, 1977), Vietnamese (Greenberg,
1972), Bengali, Omani Arabic and Kana (Kegboid, Cross-River), (Aikhenvald, 2000), Akatek
Mayan (Zavala, 2000)
(78) kt
two
(*CL
specific
)
CL
ceruza
pencil
two pencils
(79) kt
two
darab
CL
generic
ceruza
pencil
two pencils
. . . because the number of sortal Cls is fairly small. We may expect to nd more Cls in a "Cl-
language"
BUT: the number of classiers can range from just a handful to around two hundred (data from
Aikhenvald (2000))
Nung, Thai family: 4
Iwam and Chambri: 5
Vietnamese: 140
Thai and Burmese: 200
Hungarian: 20
. . . because sortal CLs are obligatory in Chinese but in Hungarian they are optional
7
BUT: classiers are optional in several CL languages, e.g. Akatek Mayan, (Zavala, 2000), Minangkabau
(Aikhenvald, 2000), informal Khmer (Greenberg, 1972), Cambodian (Goral, 1979), to mention a few
(80) a. kt
two
fej
CL
head
hagyma
onion
two onions
b. kt
two
hagyma
onion
two onions
4.2.3. The position of sortal Cls
decomposition of the DP: [
DP
D [
NumP
Num [
ClP
Cl [
NP
N ]]]]
(c.f. Cheng and Sybesma, 1999; den Dikken, 2003; Borer, 2005; Cinque and Krapova, 2007; Svenonius,
2008)
we propose that Hungarian has a phonologically zero classier, which results in the perceived optionality
of Cls
8
condition on interpretation: only canonical units are possible
7
Optional is used in a purely descriptive sense here, meaning that the Cl may or may not appear on the surface in the DP.
This can be interpreted in a number of ways: true syntactic optionality of ClP, overtness vs. covertness, a phonologically zero
Cl, etc. For concreteness, we assume that if an overt sortal Cl is absent in Hungarian, the nominal expression contains a covert
counterpart of the generic darab.
8
See Borer (2005) for a dierent proposal.
11
condition on distribution: same as specic Cls and darab
Some researchers claim cross-linguistic complementary distribution between plural marking and clas-
siers (Tsou, 1976; Chierchia, 1998)
Suppose that this claim is true, then
Are plurals and Cls are in complementary distribution because they would like to ll the same slot in
the tree, and having both violates the one lexical item per terminal rule?
No, the following data show that plurals and Cls occupy dierent positions in the tree:
the plural and sortal CLs appear on dierent sides of the head N
(81) rg-k
chewing.gum-pl
chewing gums
(82) kt
two
csk
CL
strip
rg
chewing.gum
two chewing gums
the plural must copy onto a demonstrative, but a sortal CL cannot
9
(83) Ez-ek
this-pl
a
the
hz-ak
house-scpl
These houses
(84) *Ez
this
a
the
hz-ak
house-scpl
These houses
(85) *Ez
This
szem
CL
eye
a
the
szem
CL
eye
mogyor
hazelnut
This hazelnut
(86) Ez
This
a
the
szem
CL
eye
mogyor
hazelnut
This hazelnut
9
One may try to explain the data in (81) - (86) by appealing to a morphological distinction between sortal Cls and the
plural. Then it could be maintained that sortal Cls and the plural occupy the same position in the tree, and their distributional
dierences in (81) - (86) could be explained by this morphological property. Note that this property, crucially, could not be
the suxhood of the plural. Some phonologically independent nominal modiers, such as postpositions, do copy onto the
demonstrative just like the suxal plural marker:
(i) Ez
this
alatt
under
a
the
hz
house
alatt
under
under this house
(ii) Ez-ek
this-pl
alatt
under
a
the
hz-ak
house-pl
alatt
under
under these houses
In addition, some nominal suxes do not copy onto the demonstrative. This is the case with the possessive sux a/e:
(iii) *ez-e
this-poss
a
the
hz-a
house-poss
this house of his
(iv) ez
this
a
the
hz-a
house-poss
this house of his
(87-b) is a knock-down analysis against an analysis in which sortal Cls and the plural compete for the same structural position.
12
Further, plural and sortal Cl are not in complementary distribution in Hungarian
An anaphoric sortal Cl co-occurs with the plural sux in (87-b)
10
(87) a. Vett-em
Buy.past-1.sg
tz
ten
szem
Cl
eye
mogyor-t.
hazelnut-acc
I have bought ten hazelnuts.
b. Ez-ek
this-pl
a
the
szem-ek
Cl
eye
-pl
rohadt-ak.
rotten-pl
These (ones) are rotten.
Conclusion: i) plural and sortal CLs are not realizations of the same position
ii) according to common wisdom, both Pl and CL are heads
they are in dierent projections
Is plural in the same projection as numerals (NumP), or does it have its own projection?
Numerals dont co-occur with plural-marked NPs in Hungarian
(compatible with numerals and Pl competing for the same position, but also with numerals selec-
ting for a bare NP)
(88) hrom
three
takar-(*k)
blanket-pl
three blankets
Numerals dont copy onto demonstratives like the plural does
(not compatible with numerals and Pl competing for the same position, but compatible with
numerals sitting in the spec of the projection of which the head is Pl)
assumption: copying is a property of certain heads;
also for English: assume that structure of cl and non-cl languages is essentially identical
(89) *ez
this
hrom
three
a
the
hrom
three
takar
blanket
these three blankets
English also shows that numerals and the plural marker are not in the same position: three nuts
Evidence is compatible with (90) or (91)
(90) DP
D NumP
numerals Num
Num
plural
CLP
Div
sortal CLs
NP
10
The plural marker on the demonstrative and the predicative adjective are agreement morphemes (demonstratives and
predicative adjectives always agree in number with the head N), but the plural on the CL is not agreement, as Cls never agree
with the head N in number (see all other examples on this handout).
13
(91) DP
D NumP
numerals Num
Num PlP
Pl
plural
CLP
Div
sortal CLs
NP
unless there is good evidence for (91), parsimony favors (90)
4.3. Group classiers
Hungarian
(92) az
that
a
the
csapat
bunch
lny
girl
that bunch of girls
Cantonese (Matthews and Yip, 1994, pg. 96)
(93) g
that
baan
bunch
luihji
girl
that bunch of girls
Hungarian
(94) egy
one
raj
swarm
mh
bee
a swarm of bees
Chinese (Yip and Rimmingon, 1997, pg. 18)
(95) y
one
qn
collection
mfeng
bee
a swarm of bees
We concluded in Section 4 that group Cls are nouns that take a small nominal category as a complement.
A sortal Cl is required is the embedded nominal category, because having plural individuals (required
by group Cls) is only possible if there is individuation. Since sortal Cls individuate the mass-like
denotation, a sortal Cl is necessary.
(96) Group Cl structure
NumP
numerals
Num
(plural)
NP
N
group CL
ClP
Cl
sortal CL
NP
N
head N
14
Crucially, in (96) the embedded nominal category is smaller than a full-edged DP
Support for this claim:
The nominal embedded category below a group Cl cannot contain an article or a demonstrative
(97) *egy
one
raj
swarm
ez
this
a
the
mh
bee
(98) *egy
one
raj
swarm
a
the
mh
bee
(97) and (101) may be out for semantic reasons (denite article has a uniqueness presupposition,
group Cl denotes a plurality of individuals), but no such conict arises with (99). Using a partitive
construction, (100) approximates the meaning that (99) tries to express but cannot.
(99) *egy
one
raj
swarm
ez-ek
this-pl
a
the
mh-ek
bee-pl
(100) egy
one
raj
swarm
ez-ek-bl
this-pl-from
a
the
mh-ek-bl
bee-pl-from
a swarm of these bees
We do not nd evidence that D and Dem are structurally represented in the NP embedded by
the group Cl we conclude that these categories are not projected in the embedded NP
The nominal embedded category below a group Cl cannot contain a numeral (101) (yet this can-
not be due to semantic reasons, see example (102)) or a plural morpheme
(101) *egy
one
raj
swarm
20
20
mh
bee
a swarm of 20 bees
(102) egy
a
20
20
mh-bl
bee-from
ll
comprising
(mh)raj
bee-swarm
a swarm of 20 bees
(103) *egy
one
raj
swarm
mh-ek
bee-pl
a swarm of bees
This receives a natural explanation if the embedded nominal category is smaller than NumP
If a sortal Cls is necessary for individuation in the embedded NP, then why are overt sortal Cls
ungrammatical in the embedded NP?
(104) egy
one
levl
strip
gygyszer
medicine
one strip of medicine
(105) *egy
one
levl
strip
szem
Cl
eye
gygyszer
medicine
one strip of medicine
We are led to conclude that group Cls subcategorize for the covert sortal Cl
5. Conclusion
Classier systems may be more widespread than usualy considered
Hungarian is a classier language with various overt classiers and a phonologically null classier
15
Distinction between standard classier vs. other languages
(would English be considered to be similar to Hungarian in being more like a classier language? C.f.:
a blade of grass, an ear of corn, a stick of wood, a stick of candy)
Test battery shows that sortal and group Cls have a dierent category and they are in a dierent
structural position
Adjective tests are expected to show the same pattern cross-linguistically, omission tests are not
Plural marking is not in complementary distribution with classiers
6. Appendix
(106) lists the sortal Cls of Hungarian along with their meaning when used as a noun, and a non-comprehensive
inventory of the nouns they classify. In (107) - (124) we illustrate their use.
(106) Sortal CLs and the nouns they classify
classier nominal gloss nouns classied
bokor bush potato, raspberry, rose
cikk article garlic, orange, mandarin
cserp pot pot plants
csk strip chewing gum
cs tube sweet corn, red and green pepper
darab piece any noun
fej head cabbage, onion, lettuce, kohlrabi, cauliower, broccoli
f head people in regimented situations, eg. sta
gerezd clove garlic, orange, mandarin
v sheet paper
karika ring sausage
ktet volume books and other bound volumes
rzsa rose cauliower, broccoli (the natural units into which a head of caulofolwer can be )
rd rod chitterlings and salami
szl thread hair, match, sausage, salami, ower, candle, green onion, cigarette, plank, carrot, welt
szem eye all types of nuts and berries, tomato, pepper, biscuit, pearl, sand, potatoe, cucumber
t stem grape, rose, nursling, any specic type of plant that has a nursling
vekni loaf bread
Examples
(107) ht
seven
bokor
CL
bush
krumpli
potato
seven potato plants
(108) ht
seven
cikk
CL
clove
narancs
orange
seven cloves of orange
(109) ht
seven
cserp
CL
pot
virg
ower
seven potted plants
(110) ht
seven
csk
CL
strip
rg
chewing.gum
seven chewing gums
(long, thin, not pellets)
(111) ht
seven
cs
CL
tube
kukorica
sweet.corn
seven ears of sweetcorn
(112) ht
seven
darab
CL
generic
kabt
coat
seven coats
16
(113) ht
seven
fej
CL
head
karol
cauliower
seven clauliowers
(114) ht
seven
f
CL
head
legnysg
crew
seven people belonging to
a crew
(115) ht
seven
gerezd
CL
clove
narancs
orange
seven cloves of orange
(116) ht
seven
v
CL
arc
papr
paper
seven sheets of paper
(117) ht
seven
karika
CL
circle
kolbsz
sausage
seven slices of sausage
(ring-shaped)
(118) ht
seven
ktet
CL
volume
knyv
book
seven books
(119) ht
seven
rzsa
CL
rose
karol
cauliower
seven pieces of caulio-
wer
(120) ht
seven
rd
CL
rod
szalmi
salami
seven
(121) ht
seven
szl
CL
thread
cigaretta
cigarette
seven cigarettes
(122) ht
seven
szem
CL
eye
kukorica
sweet.corn
seven grains of sweetcorn
(123) ht
seven
t
CL
stem
palnta
nursling
seven nurslings
(124) ht
seven
vekni
CL
loaf
kenyr
bread
seven loaves of bread
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2000. Classiers. A typology of noun categorization devices. Oxford studies
intypology and linguistic theory. Oxford University Press, paperback edition 2003 edn.
Allan, Keith. 1977. Classiers. Language 53: 285311.
Beckwith, Christopher I. 1992. Classiers in hungarian. In Approaches to Hungarian 4: the sturcture of
Hungarian, edited by Istvn Kenesei and Csaba Plh, pp. 197206. JATE, Szeged.
Beckwith, Christopher I. 2007. Phoronyms. Classiers, class nouns and the pseudopartitive construction.
Berkeley insights in linguistics and semiotics 68. Peter Lang, New York.
Borer, Hagit. 2005. In name only. Structuring sense. Volume I . Oxford University Press, New York.
Cheng, Lisa L.-S. and Rint Sybesma. 1998. Yi-wan tang, yi-ge tang: classiers and massiers. Tsing-Hua
Journal of Chinese Studies 28 3: 385412.
Cheng, Lisa L.-S. and Rint Sybesma. 1999. Bare and not-so-bare nouns and the structure of NP. Linguistic
Inquiry 30 4: 509542.
Chierchia, Gennaro. 1998. Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics 6 4: 339405.
Cinque, Guglielmo and Iliyana Krapova. 2007. A note on Bulgarian numeral classiers. In Pitar Mo:
a building with a view. Papers in honour of Alexandra Corneliescu., edited by Gabriela Alboiu, Andrei
Avram, Larisa Avram, and Daniela Isac, pp. 4551. Universitii din Bucureti.
Csirmaz, Anik and Anna Szabolcsi. in progress. Quantier checklist for Hungarian. In Quantication book,
edited by Edward Keenan.
Deepadung, Sujaritlak. 1997. Extension in the usage of the Thai classier tua. In Southeast Asian Linguistic
Studies in Honour of Vichin Panupong, pp. 4955. Chulalongkorn University Press, Bangkok.
den Dikken, Marcel. 2003. The structure of the Noun Phrase in Rotuman. Lincom Studies in Austronesian
LInuistics 05. Lincom Europa, Muenchen.
17
Dixon, R. M. W. 1982. Where have all the adjectives gone? And other essays in semantics and syntax.
Mouton Publishers, Berlin, New York, Amsterdam.
Dixon, R. M. W. 1986. Noun classes and noun classication in typological perspective. In Noun classes
and categorization, edited by Colette Craig, Typological Studies in Language (TSLI) 7, pp. 105112. John
Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia.
Downing, Pamela. 1996. Numeral classier systems. The case of Japanese. Studies in discourse and grammar
4. John Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia.
Farkas, Donka F. and Henritte de Swart. 2003. The semantics of incorporation. CSLI Publications.
Goral, Donald R. 1979. Numeral classier systems: a Southeast Asian cross-linguistic analysis. Linguistics
of the Tibeto-Burman Area 4 1: 172.
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1972. Numeral classiers and substantival number: problems in the genesis of a
linguistic type. Working Papers on Language Universals 9: 139.
Hundius, Harald and Ulrike Klver. 1983. Syntax and semantics of numeral classiers in Thai. Studies in
Language 7 2: 165214.
Lee, Iskop and Robert Ramsey. 2000. The Korean language. State University of New York Press, Albany.
Matthews, Stephen and Virginia Yip. 1994. Cantonese. A comprehensive grammar. Routledge grammars.
Routledge, London and New York.
Svenonius, Peter. 2008. The position of adjectives and other phrasal modiers in the decomposition of DP.
In Adjectives and adverbs: syntax, semantics and discourse, edited by Joyce McDonough and Christopher
Kennedy, Oxford studies in theoretical linguistics 19, pp. 1642. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Tsou, Benjamin K. 1976. The structure of nominal classier systems. In Austroasiatic studies II , edited by
Philip N. Jenner, Laurence C. Thompson, and Stanley Starosta, Oceanic Linguistics Special Publication
No .13, pp. 12151247. The University Press of Hawaii, Honolulu.
Yip, Po-Ching and Don Rimmingon. 1997. Chinese. An essential grammar. Routledge, London and New
York.
Zavala, Roberto. 2000. Multiple classier systems in Akatek Mayan. In Systems of nominal classication,
edited by Gunter Senft, pp. 114146. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Zhang, Hong. 2007. Numeral classiers in Mandrain Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 16: 4359.
Zhang, Niina Ning. 2009a. Counting unit words as nominal auxiliaries. National Chung Cheng Univesity,
Graduate Institute of Linguistics.
Zhang, Niina Ning. 2009b. Syntactic properties of numeral classiers in Mandarin Chinese. National Chung
Cheng Univesity, Graduate Institute of Linguistics.
18